I have a strategy guide for playing japan… I will bump it for ya.
You should buy transports regardless of what you are doing, you need boats to take control of dutch islands and to take calcutta.
Also try doing J1 DOW, it will accelerate your gameplay experience and most people have more fun doing that - it is fun for everyone. If you are playing a multiplayer and you are not going to war on the first round with Japan… people will lose interest in the game fast. There is no real advantage to postponing a declaration of war, at least from the perspective of Japan, unless you have something better to do like kill a bunch of infantry that decided to stack up on amur, which is rarely the case. Maybe the Europe half needs usa out of the war while it goes sea lion, which could cause you to wait… most of the time I still J1 DOW even if I do go sea lion.
The axis have it good like that. Also most of the fun is in the pacific in global. Maybe if the Russians started with 2 additional armor and a bomber would I find the europe half interesting.
Generally Transports and Inf/Art or Inf/Arm for the first… 3 turns is generally appropriate.
Just be wary of a US Bomber on Hawaii and leaving your TT undefended.
Japan is simultaneously easy and hard.
Easy: your grand strategy is to attack everything everywhere. Rd 1: invade Soviet Far East. If the Russian player holds, use your superior air force and local land units to destroy Soviet super stack – big help to Germany, no 18 inf rolling to Moscow. Rd2-4, build up inf and trns for seizure of south sea islands Rnd 4. Start placing miICs Rd3, first in Ksu, then Hon and then Fic. With those working you should build enough stuff to take out India Rnd 7/8 depending on how competent your opponent is. Then wheel around and take out Hawaii for win.
Hard: You have to be very careful when moving your ships around to safeguard them from counter attack by allies. Especially watch the US opening a block that Anzac can exploit. Be sure to have enough dds to block US fleets from knocking your fleet out, especially blocking them from moving into sz6. If the US goes for KJF, these problems are magnified by an order of 10.
If you invest too much into russia, the allies can turtle in the pac while US dumps heavy in the atlantic.
I usually do KJF with the allies, Russia is a lost cause no matter what you do with America, better to just own the pacific real fast then turtle egypt/london. When russia falls it is just germany / italy vs everyone.
That is why you should just blow up with japan and maintain your fame as long as possible.
Axis usually win, because this is world war 2.
@Cow:
I usually do KJF with the allies, Russia is a lost cause no matter what you do with America, better to just own the pacific real fast then turtle egypt/london. When russia falls it is just germany / italy vs everyone.
It is still very tricky to go 100% on japan, and still be able save London/Cairo before Ger/Ita wins.
yeah but it is all the allies can really do. xporting men is a biatch, the game starts at even TUV after G1 if you do not count all infrastructure units on the board (ics airbase naval base etc). So if you have to invest in transports which don’t do anything other than move groun units… then you end up playing from behind really far.
the only strategy larry harris left for the allies was a KJF. only when germany does sea lion do you want to invest in the atlantic.
Also the income evens out quickly. Bigger rewards are in the pacific that are more accessable for the allies to gain. So yes ideally the allies want to make things happen in the pacific.
Ive had better luck going hevay atlantic to protect cairo/london better then buy defensive pac to protect hawaii and anzac.
Otherwise, japan takes india and and dutch islands for a turn, and has enough air/navy to prevent you from moving too close. If you dont start putting money in the atlantic by turn 5(even then its tricky), germany will easily have russia and be getting rdy for sealion.
I usually DOW J1, so if usa is not going full pacific, it is pretty much a free win.
As USA I’m a strong believer in:
Bombers, Bombers and Bombers.
1. You can relocate them easily.
2. Japan will have a lot of problems splitting his fleet.
3. If Germany built a Navy, it would not last much. Same with Italy.
Bombers cost 12. Bombers can attack land and sea. Bombers can IC bombard. Bombers have attack 4.
Compare them to a cruiser now.
Bombers can change a 90% battle to a 40%/30% battle, letting you hold India or Russia one more turn.
Japan usually just brings everything south for the first 5 rounds till he busts calcutta. usually if you want to get anywhere against japan you have to park a big fleet on japan sea zone or have some kind of fleet to contest dutch islands.
Usually the Europe half is cut n dry. I either go barb and don’t really pay much attention to anything, just make sure germany/italy is safe and that is it lol. America can’t do jack, uk can’t do jack, so w/e.
Everything needed to take russia is already bought in the first 5 rounds, the allies got nothing.
As USA I’m a strong believer in:
Bombers, Bombers and Bombers.
1. You can relocate them easily.
2. Japan will have a lot of problems splitting his fleet.
3. If Germany built a Navy, it would not last much. Same with Italy.Bombers cost 12. Bombers can attack land and sea. Bombers can IC bombard. Bombers have attack 4.
Compare them to a cruiser now.Bombers can change a 90% battle to a 40%/30% battle, letting you hold India or Russia one more turn.
Strongly agree.
I am more of a carrier fighter guy. best bang for the buck in defense… in fact it costs more to kill it than it does to produce it.
The starting carriers that Japan has, definitely makes them one of my favorite countries to play. As the United States, I try to match the number of carriers Japan has.
@Cow:
I am more of a carrier fighter guy. best bang for the buck in defense… in fact it costs more to kill it than it does to produce it.
Carrier 16 fighters 20 = 36
2 ss 12 and 2bmb 24 = 36
and 2@2 is better than 1@2 and 2 hits
@Cow:
I am more of a carrier fighter guy. best bang for the buck in defense… in fact it costs more to kill it than it does to produce it.
Carrier 16 fighters 20 = 36
2 ss 12 and 2bmb 24 = 36
and 2@2 is better than 1@2 and 2 hits
He said defense.
so technically it is 1/1/1/1 vs 4/4/2 +soaker
(even though in reality that wouldn’t make sense, i know that)
About the cost to kill it, you have a point though
did you calculate 2 subs 2 bomber vs carrier 2 fighter? Defender still wins since subs cant hit air and you would expect 1 hit with the sub on the first round leaving the carrier to die to bombers and then the fighters kill the bombers.
sure I guess it is a win if subs linger and fighters crash n burn. plus the sub bomber thing means you are losing transports everytime you need to take back an island.
If you’re not usind DDs I will send subs alone.
Islands and frasport are not my concern. Anzac will take care of it. And if you dare to split your fleet to take back islands, you’re doomed to be sunk. Usa doesnt need to hold the position in neither pac nor atl if you can sink anything that leaves tokyo bay. Also remember you can easily relocate bombers and that you can use them on land.
